Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7

Models and tests of anchorage zones of post- tensioning tendons

Autor(en):

Burdet, Olivier L. / Sanders, David H. / Roberts, Carin L.

Objekttyp:

Article

Zeitschrift:

IABSE reports = Rapports AIPC = IVBH Berichte

Band (Jahr): 62 (1991)

PDF erstellt am:

03.11.2015

Nutzungsbedingungen Mit dem Zugriff auf den vorliegenden Inhalt gelten die Nutzungsbedingungen als akzeptiert. Die ETH-Bibliothek ist Anbieterin der digitalisierten Zeitschriften. Sie besitzt keine Urheberrechte an den Inhalten der Zeitschriften. Die Rechte liegen in der Regel bei den Herausgebern. Die angebotenen Dokumente stehen für nicht-kommerzielle Zwecke in Lehre und Forschung sowie für die private Nutzung frei zur Verfügung. Einzelne Dateien oder Ausdrucke aus diesem Angebot können zusammen mit diesen Nutzungshinweisen und unter deren Einhaltung weitergegeben werden. Das Veröffentlichen von Bildern in Print- und Online-Publikationen ist nur mit vorheriger Genehmigung der Rechteinhaber erlaubt. Die Speicherung von Teilen des elektronischen Angebots auf anderen Servern bedarf ebenfalls des schriftlichen Einverständnisses der Rechteinhaber.

Haftungsausschluss Alle Angaben erfolgen ohne Gewähr für Vollständigkeit oder Richtigkeit. Es wird keine Haftung übernommen für Schäden durch die Verwendung von Informationen aus diesem Online-Angebot oder durch das Fehlen von Informationen. Dies gilt auch für Inhalte Dritter, die über dieses Angebot zugänglich sind.

Ein Dienst der ETH-Bibliothek ETH Zürich, Rämistrasse 101, 8092 Zürich, Schweiz, www.library.ethz.ch

http://retro.seals.ch

545 Models and Tests of Anchorage Zones of Post-Tensioning Tendons Modeles et essais de zones
545
Models and Tests of Anchorage Zones of Post-Tensioning Tendons
Modeles et essais de zones d'ancrage des cables de precontrainte
Modelle und Versuche von Verankerungszonen von Vorspannkabeln
Olivier L. BÜRDET
David H. SANDERS
Scientific Associate
Prof of Civil Eng
Fed Inst of Technology
Lausanne, Switzerland
Univ of Nevada
Reno, NV, USA
Carin L. ROBERTS
Ph D candidate
Univ of Texas
John E. BREEN
Prof of Eng
Univ of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX, USA
Austin, TX, USA
Gregory L. FENVES
Prof of Civil Eng
Univ of California
Berkeley, CA, USA
SUMMARY
This paper presents the results of an investigation of the behaviour and the design of anchorage
zones of post-tensioning
tendons
The analytical
component
is a combination of Finite Element
Analysis and
Strut-and-Tie Models A total of more than 60 tests of
anchorage
zones are included
in discussion and practical guidelines
for the design proposed for incorporation in the AASHTO
Bridge Design Specification are outlined
RESUME
Cet
article
presente
les
resultats
d'un
projet
de
recherche
sur
le
comportement
et
le
dimensionnement
des zones d'ancrage des cables de precontrainte
La partie analytique com-
prend ä la fois une analyse
par
la methode des elements finis et des modeles de treillis Au total,
cet article inclut les resultats
de plus de 60 tests expenmentaux de zones d'ancrage et inclut des
directives
pratiques qui ont ete proposees pour etre inclues dans la norme amencaine de ponts
routiers AASHTO
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
Im vorliegenden Bericht werden die Resultate eines Forschungsprojektes über das Verhalten und
die Bemessung von Verankerungszonen von Vorspannkabeln beschrieben Der analytische Teil
beinhaltet sowohl Finite Element Berechnungen als auch Fachwerkmodelle Die Resultate von
mehr als 60 Versuchen an Verankerungszonen werden aufgeführt Weiter enthalt dieser Bericht
praktische Richtlinien, die für die Aufnahme in die amerikanische Strassenbrucken-Norm
AASHTO vorgeschlagen wurden
546 MODELS AND TESTS OF ANCHORAGE 1. Introduction The quest for development of a consistent
546 MODELS AND TESTS
OF ANCHORAGE
1. Introduction
The quest
for development of a consistent approach to
concrete
clearly requires a hierarchy of highly transpar
tools
These
will
from
oriented analysis
[2].
ränge
traditional
section
mechanics
suitable
fo
principles
to the more intuitive strut-and-tie models
B-regions
formal elastic or non-linear finite element analys
more
required for the D-regions. Scordelis [12] indicates that
latter are extremely useful, "
it is imperative that ex
structural
be
involved
and
qualified
engineers
of
the
results
interpretation
using
their
judge
knowledge of structural behavior
"
MacGregor [5] reit
need but gives special emphasis in the D-regions sayi
details of the reinforcement in the discontinuities c
strength
of these regions and hence must be conside
structural engineer." Marti [6] suggests that in usual a
of STM, the design is rather insensitive to the assessm
effective concrete stress, fc. While this is true
applications,
it is clearly
not
true in design
of post
anchorage
zones.
In such discontinuity zones, the
forces
transmitted to the concrete by the tendon a
high local stresses on the concrete. The sp
cause very
forces through the member causes substantia
these
serviceability limit State, with undesirable cracking, an
the anchorage zone need to be prevented.
Test results and failures during construction (See Fig
nodes or at the intersection of confined nodes and un
zones. This particular
detailing application thus poses
methods since
assessing node and strut capacity is far
dimensioning of reinforcement.
O.L BÜRDET, D.H. SANDERS, CL ROBERTS, J E BREEN, G L FENVES 547 • Local
O.L BÜRDET, D.H. SANDERS, CL ROBERTS, J E
BREEN, G L FENVES
547
• Local compression failure, in which the failure occurs at a very Short distance from the anchorage device, and is
caused by lack of confinement in the area immediately surrounding the anchorage device.
• Compression failure, similar to the previous mode failure, but with the difference that the failure occurs at a
larger distance from the anchorage device, which is itself sufficiently confined.
• Tension failure, in which the reinforcement provided to resist the tensile force induced by the spreading of the
concentrated tendon load is insufficient.
-General Zone
Figure 3 shows two regions in the anchorage zone. The local
zone, in the immediate vicinity of the anchorage device, is highly
dependant on the post-tensioning system and is the
responsibility of the supplier of the anchorage device. The
general zone is more remote from the anchorage device and is
less influenced by the post-tensioning system. It is the
responsibility of the structural engineer. Of the three modes of
failure described above, the first one occurs in the local zone,
the second mode of failure occurs in the general zone, most
to 1.5h
a) Elevation
often at the interface with the local zone, and the third mode of
failure occurs in the general zone.
General Zone
In order for anchorage devices to be deemed satisfactory, they
need to either meet maximum bearing stress and minimum
Ha
W
stiffness requirements or to be tested following a prescribed
testing procedure described in Section 4. The distinction between
local and general zone gives flexibility to the constructor, who
can choose the anchorage device and the post-tensioning
system,
b)
Plan view
a-a
without jeopardizing the integrity of the structure, and
without
Figure 3: ^^ j^^ and General Zone
unduly complicating the work of the design engineer.
4.
Local Zone Tests by Roberts
A part of the NCHRP Anchorage Zone research project consisted in an investigation focusing on the behavior of
local anchorage zones both at service State and at ultimate. The
of this study by Roberts [9] was to define
purpose
the test procedures and compliance criteria for the testing of anchorage devices. Roberts tested 31 local zone test
specimens. The behavior of local anchorage zones was found to be sensitive to the type and amount of confining
reinforcement, as well as to the cover provided around the anchorage device. Existing formulae by Richart [8] and
Nyogi [7] were enhanced to give a better prediction of the strength of a local zone. Cyclic testing of local zones
gives results similar to extended (48 hours) testing, and is more representative of the behavior of anchorage zones
under field conditions than monotonic testing. A standardized testing procedure for the local zone was proposed
by Roberts for introduction in the AASHTO Bridge Specification.
i P
5« Finite Element Analysis and Strut-and-Tie Models
It is nor practical to test all possible general zone configurations, therefore the design of the
general zone must be approached in a different manner than the local zone. The number of
7Fnu
'/* * A-
*A
+ + + -»Y
variables affecting the design of the anchorage zone remains large even though the local zone
has been addressed. A survey of the current design practice in the United States by Sanders
[10] showed that the post-tensioning industry is very creative. Tendons often present an
eccentricity, an inclination and a curvature
in the anchorage zone. Multiple tendons
are commonly used, in groups
of
two to six
tendons.
Transverse
post-tensioning
and
0
25.
+ Finite Element
transverse reactions are often present in the
- Guyon Analysis
OZ
anchorage
zone.
Special geometries are
Figure
4:
Simple
Bursting
Approx mote
Force
used to introduce the post-tensioning force Strut-and-Tie
Tours
Formulos
to the section, using for example blisters or Model with
o
0 3P(1 -o/h)
-o
0
25P( 1-o/h)
0
05.
ribs. The first phase did not consider the Elastic Stress
expanding field of external post-tensioning. Vectors
The project was
set
up
to
use
a
combination of elastic finite element
analysis, strut-and-tie
0
0102 0 3 04 05 060 7 0809
1
models and physical
tests. Linear elastic finite element analysis
Reiot^ piote s.ze o/h
offers the
advantage
of
being
a well known method of
obtaining
Figure
5: Bursting Force for Concentric
the internal state of stresses
in
a body.
As pointed
out by
Tendons
548 MODELS AND TESTS OF ANCHORAGE ZONES OF POST-TENSIONING TENDONS Ties >*—-a a a—•£—T 1—
548 MODELS AND TESTS OF ANCHORAGE ZONES OF
POST-TENSIONING TENDONS
Ties
>*—-a
a
a—•£—T
1—
1
Force in
0 0 (75MU-IU5_a20 25 03
035
Struts ond
+¦ 73
Froction
of
P
Struts
L
-0 6
t>) Strut
Relative Eccentricity e/h
'P3
Figure 6:
Strut-and-Tie Figure 7:
Forces in the Struts and Ties as a Figure 8:
Strut-and-Tie Model of an
Model
of
an
Eccentric Function of the Eccentricity
Anchorage
Zone
with
a
Curved
Anchorage Zone
Tendon, Eccentricity 0.25h and Initial
Inclination 20 degrees
Schlaich [11], the elastic State of stresses constitutes a good starting point for the development of strut-and-tie
models. Of special interest is the representation of the principal stress vectors shown in Figure 4. These vectors
give a good idea of the flow of forces through the anchorage zone and are helpful in assessing the adequacy of a
strut-and-tie model. The physical test specimens by Sanders [10] were used to demonstrate the validity of the
models and to calibrate the design formulae.
Figure 5 shows the bursting force obtained by integrating the elastic stresses perpendicular to the tendon path,
along with the force obtained from the simple strut-and-tie model shown in Figure 4. As can be observed, the
correlation is quite good. The figure also shows Guyon's equation [4] for the same force.
The real power of the strut-and-tie model is its ability to model a
wide ränge of anchorage zone configurations. Figure 6 shows a strut-
^
^
i^
¦ rtOutxJe
and-tie model for an anchorage zone with an eccentric load. Figure 7
shows the forces in the various members as a function of the
0 rt lue«»«)
Tronsverse Q 3
Force
eccentricity.
^y
STM F.0 (»0 1» Bort)
Figure 8 shows two possible strut-and-tie models for an anchorage
^
O- STU f-F(«) <V
Back)
A hopwtd fwmdo
zone with an eccentricity, an inclination and a curvature of the
0.2WO
o/hWo.»»»»*
tendon. If no tie-back reinforcement is provided, all the tendon
deviation forces are transmitted to the strut on the inside of the
tendon, and the external strut is
straight
between the reinforcement
bars. If tie-back reinforcement is provided,
the tendon deviation
Initiol Incbnotton ir
forces are distributed to both compression
struts. If the force in the
tie-back reinforcement is added to the bursting force, it is found that
Figure 9: Transverse Bursting Force as a
the
sum
^
approximately
equal to the bursting force in the case
Function of the Initial Inclination for an
without tie-back reinforcement.
Figure
9 shows the Variation
of
the
Initial Eccentricity of 0.25h
bursting force as a function of the initial inclination. The figure also
shows the results obtained from the finite element analysis and the values predicted by an approximate formula as
outlined in Section 6. In a simplified fashion, the increase in tensile force caused by the inclination of the tendon
can be approximated as one half of the net shear on the general zone summing the effect of external loads and the
transverse component of the post-tensioning force. This corresponds to the intuitive idea that roughly half of the
force is resisted by each compression strut.
0 175.
•Q- Tension on Tendon Axis
-0 12P
0 150.
CWD
from FE
h SB
0125.
-¦- Tension in Tie GH (within
quorter points) ond EF/GH
0100.
(outside quorter points)
0075.
from Strut-and-Tie Model
\- 1-0 1!
•Ar Tension on Top of
0 050.
Centerline from FE
T TT
TT
0 025.
•£- Tension
in
Top Tie
BC
0I5P
0 35P
0 35P
0 15P
0 000.
ttf&^ 1
4
—^"
(outside quorter points)
1
from Strut-and-Tie Model
a) tx>ad within
Quarter Points
the
b)
U>ad Outside the
Quarter Points
Holt Oistonce Between Anchors s/h
(s
-
0175h)
(s
0 35h)
Figure 10: Examples of Strut-and-Tie
Models with two Tendons
Figure 11: Tension Forces in an Anchorage Zone
with Two Tendons
O. L. BÜRDET, D. H. SANDERS, C. L ROBERTS, J. E. BREEN, G. L FENVES
O. L. BÜRDET, D. H. SANDERS, C. L ROBERTS, J. E. BREEN, G. L FENVES
549
The effect of groups of tendons was investigated, and it was found that, for rectangular sections with straight
tendons, the largest tensile forces are induced when
only
two tendons are used.
Figure
10 shows the two basic
configurations for two anchorages. If both tendons act within the kern of the section, the State of stresses is
similar to that induced by a single anchorage device. As the tendons move outside the kern, an increasingly large
edge tension force is induced between the anchorage devices close to the surface of the concrete. Figure 11 shows
the edge tension force between the anchorages as a function of the spacing of the anchorages.
Because the compressive stresses in the immediate vicinity of the anchorage device are usually higher than the
uniaxial compressive strength of the concrete fc, the verification of the capacity of the concrete compression struts
is critical. Most authors assume that the limiting stress in the concrete struts is some fraction of fc, which is too
constraining for anchorage zones. Sanders [10] incorporated the effect of confining reinforcement in a strut-and-
tie model. For most practical cases, however, the checks involved in such calculations are beyond the
capabilities
of the engineer. Therefore, the local zone acceptance tests are relied on for determining the adequacy of the
confined node. The critical section for the verification of the compressive stresses in the concrete struts is defined
at a certain distance from the anchorage device (in general at one times the lateral dimension of the anchorage
device). This allows one to check the compressive stresses in the concrete against the conventional value of 0.10fc
which is commonly aeeepted for strut-and-tie models.
6. Design Method for Anchoraee Zones
The goal of the NCHRP Anchorage Zones research project is the elaboration of a clear, consistent and easily
applicable method for the design of anchorage zones of post-tensioning cables. Assuming that the engineer has a
good knowledge of the location and magnitude of the force for each tendon, some idea of the size of the
anchorage device that will be required to transmit the force and the assurance that the anchorage device used
satisfies the testing
requirements
of Section 4,
guidelines
for the design of the
general
anchorage
zone are needed.
A number of procedures are suggested in the proposed AASHTO revisions. Two general procedures are allowed.
One is a detailed elastic analysis such as a valid finite element analysis
(FEA).
Rules are provided for integrating
tensile stresses and selecting appropriate limiting stress values. The second procedure allowed is the strut-and-tie
model (STM). Since this equilibrium based procedure is not sensitive to compatibility induced stresses at service
load levels, such as edge tension, or spalling stresses around anchorages, certain guidelines are provided requiring
supplemental spalling crack control reinforcement. Recognizing that either FEA or STM solutions may require
considerable extra effort for the design of some relatively simple but common applications, an approximate
procedure is also included. This procedure was developed from the results of FEA and STM parametric
studies [3]. It uses relatively simple formulae to determine the magnitude and location of the bursting force and
to check the compressive stress at the interface between the local zone and the
general
zone. It is limited to the
case of a single anchorage, or of a Single group of closely spaced anchorages acting on a rectangular cross section.
7. Evaluation of the Methodology based on Test Results by Sanders
Sanders [10] condueted a series of 36 tests of anchorage zones. In the specimens modelling Single tendon
anchorage zones, the reinforcement
patterns
and the tendon
eccentricity,
inclination and curvature were varied.
Tests of anchorage zones with multiple tendons were also condueted, with the prime variable being the spacing
between the anchors. The cracking load of 31 of the specimens by Sanders was estimated based on the elastic
stress distribution obtained from a two-dimensional Finite Element Analysis. and the tensile strength of the
concrete measured from split-cylinder tests. The
average
ratio of actual to predicted
cracking
load is 0.91, with a
Standard deviation of 0.22. Figure 12 shows the ultimate load reached by the same series of specimens, along with
the ultimate load predicted using strut-and-tie models based on elastic stress resultants at the end of the general
zone. The average ratio of predicted to ultimate is 1.44, with a Standard deviation of 0.44. Sanders [10] developed
enhancements to the cracking load prediction, including the effect of the reduction of the tensile strength of the
concrete caused by the three-dimensional state of stresses in the anchorage zone.
Taking
this modification into
account, the
average ratio of actual to predicted cracking load becomes 1.05 for all tests, with a Standard deviation
of 0.20. For the
ultimate load, Sanders also developed an enhanced STM which includes the effect of a limited
plastification of the
concrete in the immediate vicinity of the anchorage device. Taking this modification of the
model into account brings
the average ratio of the predicted ultimate load to the actual ultimate load to 1.19, with
a Standard deviation of 0.19.
One of the most notable observations made
during
the evaluation of the test results is the fact that in the large
majority of the cases, the capacity of the anchorage zone is controlled by the
strength
of the compression struts at
the interface between the local zone and the general zone. At this location the concrete has no confinement, and
is exposed to
very
large compressive stresses. Thus, increasing the reinforcement of the general anchorage zone
will in many case
lead to little or no improvement of the overall
strength
of the
anchorage
zone. This is confirmed
by the Observation of Stone and Breen [13], who noted that increasing the amount of orthogonal reinforcement
550 MODELS AND TESTS OF ANCHORAGE ZONES OF POST-TENSIONING TENDONS (the reinforcement provided in the
550 MODELS AND TESTS OF ANCHORAGE ZONES
OF
POST-TENSIONING TENDONS
(the
reinforcement
provided
in
the
general zone) is not nearly as effective as
1000
using longer and heavier spirals, which
confine the local zone and have the effect
of displacing the interface between the
Ultimate
local zone and the general zone to an
Load
area of lower compressive stresses. For
in kips
in
design purposes, it is
any
case
advisable to remember that the stresses
in the concrete struts often control the
design. Also notable is the effect of
tensile stresses existing in the anchorage
zone. The resistance these stresses
B1B2B3B4B5B6B7B8
E1E2E3E4E5E6M5
11
12
13
14
TP TP TP TP
M1M2M2M3M3M4M4M5M6ME
T1T2T3T4
provide is usually neglected in the design,
but it nevertheless
plays an important
Actual Ultimate Load
g STM Predicted Ultimate Load
role in the behavior of anchorage zones.
In several cases it was observed that
the
Figure 12:
Actual Ultimate Load and Predicted Ultimate Load for
strength of the anchorage zone exceeded
that predicted based on the capacity of
Sanders' Test Specimens (1 kip
4.54 kN)
the tension ties alone. Bürdet [3] suggests that this additional strength is caused by the fact that a
of the
part
concrete at the base of the specimens remained uncracked up to failure, thus providing an additional tensile
capacity to resist bursting forces.
8,
Conclusions
The analysis, behavior and design of anchorage zones of
post-tensioning
tendons was
investigated
using a
combination of Finite Element Analysis, Strut-and-Tie
Models
and
experimental
test
specimens.
This
combination allowed minimization of the number of
required
experimental
specimens and generalization the
results in the form of simple design formulae. A consistent design methodology allowing use of finite element
analyses, strut-and-tie models, and for certain frequently occurring cases, relatively simple design formulae was
developed and has been proposed for inclusion in the AASHTO Bridge Design Specification. A Standard testing
procedure for anchorage devices and their necessary confinement was also proposed.
The cracking loads computed based on the elastic stresses and the
split cylinder strength of the concrete are
slightly smaller than the actual cracking loads, possibly because of
the detrimental effect of the transverse
compression. The ultimate capacity of anchorage zones can be conservatively predicted using the Strut-and-Tie
Model. This investigation clearly indicates the critical nature of the compressive struts in anchorage zones. This
differs from many other D-region applications in which the struts are not as criotical.
References
[I] American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO),"Standard Specification for Highway Bridges",
13th edition, 1983.
[2]
Breen, J.E., "Why Structural Concrete," Final Report IABSE Colloquium on Structural Concrete, Stuttgart, April 1991.
[3]
Bürdet, O.L., "Analysis and
of Texas at Austin, May 1990.
Design of Anchorage Zones in Post-Tensioned Concrete Bridges," PhD dissertation, University
[4]
Guyon, Y., "Prestressed Concrete," John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1953
[5]
[6]
MacGregor, J.G., "Sub-Theme 2.4 - Dimensioning and Detailing," Final Report IABSE Colloquium on Structural Concrete,
Stuttgart, April 1991.
Marti, P., "Sub-Theme 2.4 - Dimensioning and Detailing," Final Report IABSE Colloquium on Structural Concrete,
Stuttgart, April 1991.
[7]
Nyiogi, S.K., "Bearing Strength of Reinforced Concrete Blocks," ASCE Structural Division Journal, Vol. 101, No ST5, May
1975.
[8]
Richart, F.E., Brandtzaeg, A, and Brown, R.L., "A Study of the Failure of Concrete under Combined Compressive
Stresses," Research Bulletin No 185, University of Illinois Engineering Experimental Station, 1928
[9] Roberts, C.L., "Behavior and Design of the Local Anchorage Zone in Post-Tensioned Concrete," MS thesis, University of
Texas at Austin, May 1990.
[10] Sanders, D.H., "Design and Behavior of Post-Tensioned Concrete Anchorage Zones," PhD dissertation, University of Texas
at Austin,
August
1990.
[II] Schlaich, J., Schäfer, K., Jennewein, M., "Towards a Consistent Design of Structural Concrete," PCI Journal, Vol. 32, No 3,
May-June
1987, pp
74-151.
[12] Scordelis, AC,
"Analysis of Structural Concrete Systems," Final Report IABSE Colloquium on Structural Concrete,
Stuttgart, Apnl 1991.
[13] Stone, W.C., Breen, J.E., "Behavior of Post-Tensioned
Girder Anchorage Zones," Center for Transportation Research
Report No 208-2, University of Texas at Austin, January 1981.